> > - We must improve and doesn't trash tests made in unstable:
>
> Why do we need to do that? A package which is clearly improved or outdated
> does not need any testing.
Because, for example if i release three revision of a package in a month and i
upload in unstable,
it is in a good status
Actually debian has three distro "level": unstable testing and stable.
There are some policy for packages entering in testing but for stable we
must to go "on freeze when ready" and fix all remain rc bugs before
release. With this proposal i want to remove the release concept but we
need some infr
I had opened a dehs[1] development mailing list[2] on alioth to
coordinate issues and work.
Anybody want discuss ideas, improve or work on dehs an watch file system
could subscribe to the list[3].
Thanks,
Stefano
[1] http://dehs.alioth.debian.org
[2] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[3] http://lists.alioth.deb
>The community might start considering it less useless if an
>explanation of what it is supposed to be good for was actually
>available. In particular, why should a maintainer care about watch
>files if he uses something else than uscan to keep track of upstream
>happenings?
>From time to time, th
>I know that I thougt dehs per se not too useful, but the watch section
>on qa.d.o has inspired me to write watch files for two of my packages.
>Not much (2 out of 7), admittedly, but I think that it's fairly useful.
>I think the experimental columns are overkill (as people packaging
>experimental
After another gruelling discussion on #debian-devel about the useless of
dehs and the lack of watch file (75,60% of non native debian packages
doesn't had one), I think that dehs is start to begin only my own
personal toys, so i'm thinking to stop it and to leave alioth resources
and put my develop
>What do you do with packages that have uncooperative upstream and thus
>a watch file is not possible?
>
>apg's web host, for example, doesn't support directory listings, so I
>had to resort on checking the fingerprint of the download web page to
>find out whether there is a new release.
>
>Greetin
Il giorno mer, 26-01-2005 alle 09:02 +0100, Free Ekanayaka ha scritto:
> Thanks for this effort.
>
> Would it make sense to support queries of dehs by maintainer email
> address?
>
> This ways it would be easier for people to check the status of their
> own packages.
This functionality is
Il giorno mar, 25-01-2005 alle 13:56 +0100, Wouter Verhelst ha scritto:
> I'm not convinced having a watch file is always useful.
>
I agree with you.
> I would hope a maintainer would follow the announcements of the software
I agree with this. Dehs/Watch is not a system for bypassing upstream
ma
Il giorno mar, 25-01-2005 alle 07:49 +0100, Goswin von Brederlow ha
scritto:
> Bluefuture <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The dehs system now is regular running again every two days on alioth
> > (and so also on the info feed to developer.php on qa).
> > Looking
The dehs system now is regular running again every two days on alioth
(and so also on the info feed to developer.php on qa).
Looking at no_watch page[1] there are:
Total source packages without watch file: 6324
Total source packages: 8285
%: 76,33%
But seems also that there are:
1621 package
Another interesting link is Electronic Design Automation (EDA) software on
Linux: http://www.linuxeda.com/
Cheers,
Blue.
Try to take a look to this http://lists.duskglow.com/open-graphics/
about problems, solutions and ASIC vs FPGA proposed for a real project
to build a open design 2d/3d graphic card.
Cheers,
Blue.
Actually Ubuntu Linux uses pmount:
pmount is a wrapper around the standard mount program which permits
normal
users to mount removable devices without a matching /etc/fstab entry.
Together
with hal and gnome-volume-manager (or similar programs) this will
provide
fully automatic device handling wit
14 matches
Mail list logo
